Presidential candidates....any good neutral charts to compare them?

[Ottakee]

Are there any good neutral voters guide type charts out there that compare the candidates (including 3rd party) on the issues? I want just the facts, not one candidate/party slamming another which is what almost everything out there seems to be.

 

Any ideas for this still frustrated and undecided voter?

[Joules]

The League of Women Voters usually has info, but it's not much:

http://c3.thevoterguide.org/v/ajc16/race-detail.do?id=14553785

 

[Joules]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/nov/01/comparing-and-contrasting-clinton-trump-johnson-an/

 

This seems comprehensive, but it would be lots of work to click and read the quotes for each position.  

http://2016election.procon.org/view.source-summary-chart.php

 

 

There really seems to be more comparisons from primary times, but I guess they are still accurate:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/tag/what-the-candidates-believe/

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/candidates-on-the-issues.html

 

[SemiSweet]

You could take the isidewith.com test to find out who is most like you on the issues. It can be expanded for more detail or taken with less. I have found it quite accurate.

[Ottakee]

You could take the isidewith.com test to find out who is most like you on the issues. It can be expanded for more detail or taken with less. I have found it quite accurate.

 I did find that and I was split almost 50/50 between candidates.  UGG......normally I know who to vote for.

 

To complicate matters even more, there is a write in candidate for circuit court judge in our county.  This is the person that hears custody cases, foster care cases, etc.  Trying to learn all I can about the write in candidate as I have person experience with the incumbent and am not super impressed. 

[SemiSweet]

I did find that and I was split almost 50/50 between candidates. UGG......normally I know who to vote for.

 

To complicate matters even more, there is a write in candidate for circuit court judge in our county. This is the person that hears custody cases, foster care cases, etc. Trying to learn all I can about the write in candidate as I have person experience with the incumbent and am not super impressed.

That's rough. I usually fall pretty strongly on one side of the aisle, no idea what I'd do this election if I was more moderate.

[ktgrok]

Are there any good neutral voters guide type charts out there that compare the candidates (including 3rd party) on the issues? I want just the facts, not one candidate/party slamming another which is what almost everything out there seems to be.

 

Any ideas for this still frustrated and undecided voter?

Two ideas, one is to take one of the quizzes out there that asks you your views on a bunch of subjects, then tells you which candidate lines up the most. 

 

the other is to go to the candidate website and read over their platform. They generally have an "issues" button you can click on to see their plans/policy ideas. That's what I do. 

[ktgrok]

 I did find that and I was split almost 50/50 between candidates.  UGG......normally I know who to vote for.

 

To complicate matters even more, there is a write in candidate for circuit court judge in our county.  This is the person that hears custody cases, foster care cases, etc.  Trying to learn all I can about the write in candidate as I have person experience with the incumbent and am not super impressed. 

 

For judges I ask my friends that are lawyers. 

[Katy]

I'd go to the candidate's website and read their positions; when I'm unfamiliar with judges (due to moving recently), I typically leave these blank.

[poppy]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/nov/01/comparing-and-contrasting-clinton-trump-johnson-an/

 

This seems comprehensive, but it would be lots of work to click and read the quotes for each position.  

http://2016election.procon.org/view.source-summary-chart.php

 

 

There really seems to be more comparisons from primary times, but I guess they are still accurate:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/tag/what-the-candidates-believe/

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/candidates-on-the-issues.html

 

This made me laugh, from Politifact: "His proposal would eliminate four of the seven tax brackets. It would repeal the death tax, which is also known as the estate tax. "

Who calls it the death tax?

[Joules]

This made me laugh, from Politifact: "His proposal would eliminate four of the seven tax brackets. It would repeal the death tax, which is also known as the estate tax. "

Who calls it the death tax?

Must be regional...I hear it referred to as the "death tax" all the time. 

 

ETA: I guess I live in an area where most people are against estate tax.  On further research, it seems that the phrase is used by people opposed to it.  

Edited November 7, 2016 by Joules

[umsami]

For Judges, in my State, the Florida Bar actually asks attorneys to rate them.  They break them down based on how much experience they've had with that particular judge.  Maybe your State's bar does a similar thing?

 

I know I've taken quizzes that have asked me my views on various issues and then matched with me a candidate.  Would say like you are 67% aligned with candidate X, 34% Y, etc.  I'll see if I can find one.

[SquirrellyMama]

This made me laugh, from Politifact: "His proposal would eliminate four of the seven tax brackets. It would repeal the death tax, which is also known as the estate tax. "

Who calls it the death tax?

I hear it called death tax most of the time, but we live around a lot of farmers. They tend to be against it.

 

Kelly

[poppy]

Wow, interesting. Do you think these people know what the estate tax actually entails ?  Or are just anti-tax in general?

[Sharpie]

Wow, interesting. Do you think these people know what the estate tax actually entails ?  Or are just anti-tax in general?

 

If they are farmers, they know in real life what it means. 

 

[poppy]

If they are farmers, they know in real life what it means. 

 

 

What do you mean? Honestly asking.  Farms are not subject to different rules than anyone else.  The first $11 million for each couple is not subject to any estate tax.  Are farmers really that wealthy?

[AmandaVT]

Another idea is to make a list of the top 3 (or however many you want) issues that matter most to you and then check on the candidates' positions on those issues. And how they propose to pay for them/pass them through congress. That's what I did when choosing who to vote for for Gov here. I almost always vote for one party, but switched this year for Gov, when I realized his positions were more realistic and more accurately lined up with what our family needs at this time. 

 

It might help you zero in on what is important to you and your family and cut away the surrounding "noise" of the election. 

 

Good luck with whatever you decide! If you can't decide, you can always vote for Vermin Supreme. :-)

[bibiche]

 

Good luck with whatever you decide! If you can't decide, you can always vote for Vermin Supreme. :-)

 

Oooh!  Free pony!!!

[Guest]

Best way is generally to go to their websites and compare and contrast their own statements, since you can assume each candidate is speaking equally highly of themselves and their ideas to generate about the same level of puff on top of actual facts.

 

And then assume when they get into office they can realistically achieve about 1/3 of their promises, and see which is most likely to be their pet cause by how emphasized it is in their policy statements. It's a surprisingly accurate way of checking.

[Farrar]

What do you mean? Honestly asking.  Farms are not subject to different rules than anyone else.  The first $11 million for each couple is not subject to any estate tax.  Are farmers really that wealthy?

 

I don't know much about this, but it wouldn't surprise me that the value of the land of a large family farm could exceed that while the family taking ownership might be working at the equivalent of lower middle class incomes and carrying a lot of debt and thus the tax could be a hardship or involve breaking up the family farm and selling off part of their livelihood. Basically, I know farmers are often land rich and cash poor.

 

I do think it's common to refer to it as the death tax among many people. It's clearly a bias thing either way - death is something everyone deals with, estate makes a person sound rich.

Edited November 7, 2016 by Farrar

[Farrar]

I was thinking about the OP's question... I think the problem with charts is that you lose a sense of context. Some of the positions that both the candidates are espousing are positions they haven't held for very long, others are positions they've been true to for many years. Some of the positions are things they rarely mention or clearly don't care much about or talk very eloquently about, others are things that are super important to them that they speak about all the time. And, of course, they each have leadership styles that will help determine how much they achieve and what sorts of things they get on the agenda. In order to get that, I think you need to go to a newspaper or news site that you trust to be relatively fair and read the analysis. I hesitate to suggest which papers or publications though. And it really has been a landslide of endorsements from even the typically "other side" leaning papers for one candidate over the other - or papers that usually endorse have abstained this year. But I'm thinking that if you're still on the fence at this point that you might be someone who doesn't have a media source you trust, which is unfortunate because everyone needs that.

[MistyMountain]

I like the website ontheissues.org to look up candidates views.

[bibiche]

Here's a list of newspaper endorsements (and anti-endorsements) for this presidential election: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_endorsements_in_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016

[Joules]

Here's a list of newspaper endorsements (and anti-endorsements) for this presidential election: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_endorsements_in_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016

 

This is really interesting.  Thanks for sharing.

[Tanaqui]

If you're genuinely undecided at this point, it might actually be okay to just sleep in tomorrow. At least then you know you can't regret your vote.

 

Or restrict your vote to the local issues, which you probably know more about.

[HomeMum]

I don't trust any of the media or even supposedly 'neutral' big online resources to actually be neutral anymore. When I heard that Fact Check had several large biases after one of the debates, I pretty much stopped trusting everything. Tripple check anything you believe these days.

Edited November 7, 2016 by HomeMum

[Meriwether]

If they are farmers, they know in real life what it means. 

 

 No joke.

[Ausmumof3]

What do you mean? Honestly asking. Farms are not subject to different rules than anyone else. The first $11 million for each couple is not subject to any estate tax. Are farmers really that wealthy?

I have no idea what it's like where you are but here farm land is worth a massive amount of money. And yet although farmers have a massive amount of apparent wealth on paper they often have very little or even negative disposable income from year to year so needing to come up with a lot of money when someone dies may mean the family have to sell the farm land.

 

I don't think we have these laws anymore but my grandparents were market gardeners and were forced to sell the market garden when their parents died because although they didn't have ready disposable money the tax was so high.

[umsami]

I don't trust any of the media or even supposedly 'neutral' big online resources to actually be neutral anymore. When I heard that Fact Check had several large biases after one of the debates, I pretty much stopped trusting everything. Tripple check anything you believe these days.

 

But what you "heard" is not actually true.   FactCheck is actually still regarded as a non-partisan accurate source for facts.  The only people who have trouble with it tend to have a questionable relationship with the truth.  It's quite hard to say one didn't say something when there is actual tape and video of one saying it. :D

Edited November 7, 2016 by umsami

[Lady Florida.]

Wow, interesting. Do you think these people know what the estate tax actually entails ?  Or are just anti-tax in general?

 

I've heard it called the death tax and the inheritance tax. However many people I've come across don't actually know your inheritance has to be pretty big in order for you to be taxed on it. 

[athomeontheprairie]

It is only referred to as a death tax here and it is absolutely crippling to farmers.

I have no idea what it's like where you are but here farm land is worth a massive amount of money. And yet although farmers have a massive amount of apparent wealth on paper they often have very little or even negative disposable income from year to year so needing to come up with a lot of money when someone dies may mean the family have to sell the farm land.

 

I don't think we have these laws anymore but my grandparents were market gardeners and were forced to sell the market garden when their parents died because although they didn't have ready disposable money the tax was so high.

This.

 

OP, I'm still struggling with this election. Thanks for asking your question.

[poppy]

It is only referred to as a death tax here and it is absolutely crippling to farmers.

This.

 

OP, I'm still struggling with this election. Thanks for asking your question.

This has really been illuminating , thanks.

 

Googling tells me that farmers losing out to the estate tax is a myth ...

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/04/14/the-facts-about-the-estate-tax-and-farmers/?client=safari

 

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/3/the-estate-tax-isnt-destroying-family-farms.html

 

But clearly there is a perception that is powerfully compelling.

 

Or maybe the links are wrong . Of course I will not claim to be an expert based on a quick search of 'is death tax killing farmers' while waiting for my daughters scout meeting to end.

 

Either way, the infographic makes more sense now. Though I do think it was worded oddly . 'He is opposed to the [pejorative] , otherwise known as [ formal name ]' sounds like an Onion article!

[Sharpie]

I have no idea what it's like where you are but here farm land is worth a massive amount of money. And yet although farmers have a massive amount of apparent wealth on paper they often have very little or even negative disposable income from year to year so needing to come up with a lot of money when someone dies may mean the family have to sell the farm land.

 

.

 

This in spades.  Farms are asset rich and cash poor.  Just for instance, this year a farmer I know personally will rise at 4 a.m., work the entire day, heading to bed after 10 p.m. and at the end of this year, will not have made one penny.  His income is negative.

[Meriwether]

This has really been illuminating , thanks.

 

Googling tells me that farmers losing out to the estate tax is a myth ...

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/04/14/the-facts-about-the-estate-tax-and-farmers/?client=safari

 

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/3/the-estate-tax-isnt-destroying-family-farms.html

 

But clearly there is a perception that is powerfully compelling.

 

Or maybe the links are wrong . Of course I will not claim to be an expert based on a quick search of 'is death tax killing farmers' while waiting for my daughters scout meeting to end.

 

Either way, the infographic makes more sense now. Though I do think it was worded oddly . 'He is opposed to the [pejorative] , otherwise known as [ formal name ]' sounds like an Onion article!

There were any number of things wrong in the first article. In addition to things that were incorrect, there were several things that were a big deal that were minimized. For example, the idea that you only had to sell off part of the farm made it all hunky dory?  Selling off acreage is a big deal, not an oh by the way.

Edited November 8, 2016 by Meriwether

[Sharpie]

Selling acreage often means the farm cannot support itself.

[poppy]

But it doesn't impact 99.4% of farmers at all, according to the article: "The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that with the exemptions, only 0.6 percent of farms would have to pay an estate tax.  (Another 2.1 percent would file returns but would owe no taxes.) The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates that only 120 farms and small business, where at least half the assets are in farm or business assets, had to pay the estate tax in 2013."  

[8circles]

I don't know who is on your ballot, but here are the websites of the candidates on my ballot.  I haven't seen any chart that really gives enough information - might aw well go straight to the source.

 

Donald Trump https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

Hillary Clinton https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

Gary Johnson https://www.johnsonweld.com/issues

Darrell Castle http://castle2016.com/issues/

Jill Stein http://www.jill2016.com/plan

Monica Moorehead http://www.workers.org/wwp/our-campaign-candidates/

Rocky Roque De La Fuente https://www.rocky2016.com/national-issues

[Frances]

But it doesn't impact 99.4% of farmers at all, according to the article: "The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that with the exemptions, only 0.6 percent of farms would have to pay an estate tax. (Another 2.1 percent would file returns but would owe no taxes.) The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates that only 120 farms and small business, where at least half the assets are in farm or business assets, had to pay the estate tax in 2013."

I work as a tax economist in a state with a significant number of farms and ranches, and the statistics above accurately reflect the situation here.

[Meriwether]

This in spades.  Farms are asset rich and cash poor.  Just for instance, this year a farmer I know personally will rise at 4 a.m., work the entire day, heading to bed after 10 p.m. and at the end of this year, will not have made one penny.  His income is negative.

Mom always said that a farmer is the only person who lives poor and dies rich.

 

For those who are curious about the assets it takes to farm, try a little of this math from my area of the country:

 

Land: approximately $20,000/acre. It is good land, productive. And the prices have been good recently (But don't overspend buying land. A few bad years will see you losing everything if you can't make the payments.) Average size in my state is about 350 acres, but there are many small hobby farms that bring the average down. A farmer will typically have more than that.

 

So, you've purchased your land. Now you can buy a tractor. Depending on condition, you can buy a smallish used one for 20,000-50,000 or so. A larger barely used one can be upwards of 400,000. You'll definitely need to start with used, though. New ones are $$$$$$.

 

Now a combine. I don't know if you can get a decent one for less than $100,000, but you can easily spend $300,000+ on a used one. Don't even bother looking at a new one. If you are extremely lucky, you can look into buying a new one at some point. But, really, the new ones are for the 2nd+ generation to buy.

 

Then the smaller purchases: grain cart, truck, sprayer, disc, etc.

 

Storage. You ought to have some kind of grain bin or silo. You need a barn. As you might be starting to guess, storage isn't cheap. You should also have a shop and tools to keep all that $$$$$ equipment in running condition.

 

These are the most obvious expenses that a farmer is going to have. There are many others.

 

 

My dad bought a modest farm in a place where land was cheap almost 30 years ago. He started making a profit about 10 years ago. He is still not rich. His income is middle class now. One year, during which our family worked our butts off, the farm showed a $7 profit. Seven dollars. Of course we didn't start out with remotely decent equipment. Dad had the added frustration of working with equipment that needed constant work. Even still, all the profit from those first years went back into the farm. Buying into farming is extremely hard to do. If each generation of farmers had to start from scratch, few people would be willing to do it. Kids should be able to inherit the family farm. The kids probably started doing work on the farm before they entered school. It is a family business. 

 

 

[mom@shiloh]

I don't know much about this, but it wouldn't surprise me that the value of the land of a large family farm could exceed that while the family taking ownership might be working at the equivalent of lower middle class incomes and carrying a lot of debt and thus the tax could be a hardship or involve breaking up the family farm and selling off part of their livelihood. Basically, I know farmers are often land rich and cash poor.

 

I do think it's common to refer to it as the death tax among many people. It's clearly a bias thing either way - death is something everyone deals with, estate makes a person sound rich.

 

My family will need to deal with this.  My dad farmed between 600-1,000 acres in the Midwest.  In that area, land has sold for up to $20K an acre recently.  In some circumstances, the "death tax" means that the land has to be sold to pay the taxes.  It can make it impossible for the family farm to be passed from one generation to the next.  That is why farmers oppose it.  

[umsami]

Not sure if this will help, but it's a quiz on if you are a well-informed voter.  Might give you some ideas of areas where you want to research?  (It doesn't really go into does this party advocate this or that, but is more about the US's health as a whole on various issues education, health care, debt, infrastructure, etc.)

 

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/informed-voter-quiz/

 

 

[poppy]

My family will need to deal with this.  My dad farmed between 600-1,000 acres in the Midwest.  In that area, land has sold for up to $20K an acre recently.  In some circumstances, the "death tax" means that the land has to be sold to pay the taxes.  It can make it impossible for the family farm to be passed from one generation to the next.  That is why farmers oppose it.  

 

$20 million dollars in land? Wow.

[8circles]

My family will need to deal with this.  My dad farmed between 600-1,000 acres in the Midwest.  In that area, land has sold for up to $20K an acre recently.  In some circumstances, the "death tax" means that the land has to be sold to pay the taxes.  It can make it impossible for the family farm to be passed from one generation to the next.  That is why farmers oppose it.  

 

Jumping off from this post because I think the term "family farm" is misleading.

 

I am from the midwest.  I know several families who claim to have "family farms".  Not one of those family members do anything even remotely like farm work.  They are MASSIVE farms run 100% by hired hands and virtually all family members have other jobs "for fun" - shopkeeping, bank teller, etc.  These are people that I am related to through marriage so these are not through the grapevine rumors.  I know who these people are.  In one particular case, I know that the farm has been inherited through 2 generations and I promise you, this "death tax" didn't hurt their bottom line.

 

I think calling these "family farms" is misleading. 

 

That doesn't mean that the estate tax is never burdensome.  I'm sure that it sometimes is.  But lets be real about what these "family farms" really are.

[umsami]

Jumping off from this post because I think the term "family farm" is misleading.

 

I am from the midwest.  I know several families who claim to have "family farms".  Not one of those family members do anything even remotely like farm work.  They are MASSIVE farms run 100% by hired hands and virtually all family members have other jobs "for fun" - shopkeeping, bank teller, etc.  These are people that I am related to through marriage so these are not through the grapevine rumors.  I know who these people are.  In one particular case, I know that the farm has been inherited through 2 generations and I promise you, this "death tax" didn't hurt their bottom line.

 

I think calling these "family farms" is misleading. 

 

That doesn't mean that the estate tax is never burdensome.  I'm sure that it sometimes is.  But lets be real about what these "family farms" really are.

 

Perhaps there should be some sort of exemption based on acreage, heads of cattle/pigs/etc.?  Would that make sense?

 

Honestly, as farming is so vital for our country, I want to do everything I can to keep smaller farms out of the hands of conglomerates.  I would support measures that do that as I think it's healthier for all. 

[ktgrok]

Perhaps there should be some sort of exemption based on acreage, heads of cattle/pigs/etc.?  Would that make sense?

 

Honestly, as farming is so vital for our country, I want to do everything I can to keep smaller farms out of the hands of conglomerates.  I would support measures that do that as I think it's healthier for all. 

 

From what the statistics are showing, smaller farms already are exempt. I think it was said less than 1% of farms are effected?